Posted by: graemebird | October 13, 2006

…For it is written:”Go forth and steal their young maidens.”

From Catallaxy. In support of a rationally self-interested AND internationally ethical immigration policy:

“In response to Triguboff, Carr said 25 mill (I think.) Any more than needs a pretty powerful justification.”

No thats complete horseshit. There is no limit to the ABSOLUTE NUMBERS that we can have in this country. And there is no conflict whatsoever between numbers of humans and bio-diversity if policy is right.

Its not the FINAL POPULATION that Harry got wrong. Its the GROWTH RATE.

“In response to Triguboff, Carr said 25 mill (I think.) Any more than needs a pretty powerful justification.”

TO WHOM?

Usually when you have to justify something you have to justify it to SOMEONE.

WHOYOUTALKIN’BOUTMICHAEL? (Said with the Gary Coleman LOOK)

God? Jehovah? Gaia? The people at Prodeo?

Instead we have to justify NOT allowing more then out fair share of immigrants being able to take advantage of this terrific place. But we don’t even have to justify THAT too much. Ultimately from an ethical point of view we must err on the side of growing ‘too fast’ then ‘too slow.’

That is we set policy to the advantage of the people who are already citizens yet when in doubt err on the upside.

We can absorb a lot more people (and therefore we SHOULD absorb a lot more people) if we get rid of any of this MULTICULTI thinking and also if we STEAL, POACH OR OTHERWISE ACQUIRE the rest of the worlds unatttached young maidens.

We must take their young maidens give them free access to us and we to them.

Sounds like a joke I know but when you think it through you will find I’m right.

And for now its inappropriate to take any more Muslim males (at least for permanent residence or citizenship or even for unrestricted travel to the major centres or anywhere near important military areas. Such a guest-worker program would be strictly an outback or “BUSH” deal.).

Any attempt NOT to suspend Muslim males will REDUCE the hypothetical OPTIMUM number of migrants that we can rightly absorb and so such foolishness is itself unethical.

Ultimately the ETHICALLY OPTIMAL number of migrants can be callibrated (as a rule of thumb) by figuring out WHAT MIGRATION WILL MAKE US MORE ABLE TO REPEL INVADERS.

Obviously more people mean a greater taxation and recruitment base. And therefore the ability to defend ourselves with greater ease from the on-paper resources standpoint.

But then again Rome beat all comers as a setup of one or two millions (or at least a very low population) and then gave it all away when she had (perhaps) 70 millions and on paper could not possibly be beaten…. She gave up the ghost to a ragtag bunch of savages..

So its the social coherence. And the ability (to without a propaganda machine or significant public spending) build some sort of loyalty, social cohesion, social stability and yes GRATITUDE for this country. We have to (without public money) somehow maintain and build on the Australian ethos and a non-racial version of Australianess.

The OPTIMUM MIGRATION RATE from that point of view isn’t an independent number or percentage.

It is not independent from strictly internal policy.

It is not independent from our CHOICE of migrants.

It is not independent from the degree of our success in deep-sixing any of these hateful Multi-Culti ideas as well as our success in suspending ALL or at least MOST further male muslim immigration.

This ought to be no disrespect to our Muslim brother-and-sister AUSTRALIANS.

We can tell them that we can absorb their cousins who are sheilas. Maybe we can make up for blocking access to their cousins who are males by taking twice the sheila quota. (To my way of thinking their ought be NO unattached sheila quota).

But the blokes have to stay in their own miserable little countries until they have sorted them out.

And perhaps…….

And Just MAYBE……

It might just be……

IT MAY BE THE CASE THAT WE COULD HELP!!!!!!! A LITTLE …… WITH THAT?…….. “SORTING-OUT!!!”…. PROCESS.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

“What do you do with the excess sheilas? Who’s going to satisfy their sexaul desires? You alone?”

With the Babes as draw-card we can get the best of the fellas. We can outcompete America and Canada for the male migrants that will be best for this country.

But the main thing is that since the guys and gals would have to marry outside thier culture-and-racial-group, in most cases, the next generation will be AUSTRALIANISED more readily and we can avoid seperatism and ghettoisation.

You know I’m right.

You just cannnot quite believe it.

Might have to pinch yourself.

You remind me of when Sean Connery CAME TOO in that BOND movie “GOLDFINGER”.

He regains conciousness and there is this hot-looking Babe there.

“Who Are You” says 007.

“Pussy Galore” says the Babe.

“I MUST be dreaming” says 007.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

My plan would be pretty much the only conceivable way we could deal with the sort of growth rates that Harry was implying from a social-COHESION point of view.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. Your comparison with Rome is simply wrong Birdie. You need to read Peter Brown. The ‘barbarians’ were not ‘savages’, nor did Rome ‘give up the ghost’. The population figures aren’t right either.

  2. Yeah well Samuel.

    Thats good.

    But do give me the better information.

    Thats how I operate. Put out my best understanding, wait to be corrected, and update quickly at the first available opportunity without losing any skin in it.

    But do give me the better information…..

    1. The ‘barbarians’ were not ’savages’

    Alaric or Attila might have spoken four languages apeice. They may have been educated in Rome and been what would later be called Renaissonce men……

    Is THIS what you were talking about? Some of the LEADERSHIP.

    Convince me that the rest of these low-lifes weren’t savages.

    2.nor did Rome ‘give up the ghost’.

    You cannot be serious. Technically they had the economic power to defeat all comers? Surely? Instruct me on this.

    3. The population figures aren’t right either.

    Well clue me in Sam…. I think you might be able to help me out here. So don’t hold out on me.

  3. Graeme – check this out!

    http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/its-a-war-zone-out-there-as-girls-fight-for-dream-date/2006/11/03/1162340050189.html

    Kareen Yazbek, a Beirut psychologist, says the lack of available men is a constant theme in her discussions with young women recovering from depression and drug addiction.

    “Throughout my practice, the main issue that comes up with many young women is that they can’t find anyone to be with or to marry,” Yazbek says. “Among college-age girls it’s not such a problem, but after graduation there’s a big change as the men start seeking work outside of Lebanon.

    “The social pressures on young women are just huge. The focus is more and more on being beautiful, on pleasing other people. The competition is intense, conformity is a big thing, and everyone, rich and poor, gets plastic surgery. You can go to parts of Beirut where almost every young woman has the same little nose.”

    And the big prize, all seem to agree, is the attention of one of the visiting native sons.

    “The guys that remain in Lebanon are the stupid ones!” exclaims Nayiri Kalayjian, 19, who is hitting the bars on Monot Street, in central Beirut, with three girlfriends. “We’re too good for them. The ones who remain in Lebanon are the ones with closed mentalities, the ones who just want a virgin girl.”

  4. Sad isn’t it.

    This is the environment we must tearfully accept if we are to do both the right morally and in our national self-interest, vis a vis our immigration policy.

    How do you get a good Muslim girl out of her Berka and into a titty-top?

    Might be easier to do it in the thousands then individually.

  5. “On the Titanic, the richest men had a lower survival rate (34%) than the poorest women (46%) (though that’s not how it looked in the movie). That in itself is remarkable. The rich, powerful, and successful men, the movers and shakers, supposedly the ones that the culture is all set up to favor — in a pinch, their lives were valued less than those of women with hardly any money or power or status. The too-few seats in the lifeboats went to the women who weren’t even ladies, instead of to those patriarchs.

    Most cultures have had the same attitude. Why? There are pragmatic reasons. When a cultural group competes against other groups, in general, the larger group tends to win out in the long run. Hence most cultures have promoted population growth. And that depends on women. To maximize reproduction, a culture needs all the wombs it can get, but a few penises can do the job. There is usually a penile surplus. If a group loses half its men, the next generation can still be full-sized. But if it loses half its women, the size of the next generation will be severely curtailed. Hence most cultures keep their women out of harm’s way while using men for risky jobs.”

    Precisely the sort of basis behind my immigration policy Jason. And not only that the girls children become integrated in a single generation, the girls don’t get in the way of young male heavy work employment. They boost our population without undermining our social cohesiveness. They don’t themselves tend to join violent gangs and carry out violent crime. And their very presence means we can attract the cream of the best male immigration as well, under the terms of our choosing.

    I know what you are thinking. But the logic is simply inescapable. I last tested it out on a Serbian babe New Years before last. She had memories of the incredible problems they had with excessive movement of an alien population in her midst as she was growing up. She understood what I was saying straight away.

  6. Canada seems to have adopted your idea in their new refugee policy. They’ll only take children, women and married men. Not exactly what you proposed but close enough that I’m prepared to say you were nearly a decade ahead of your time.

    • You can only take so many single men before asking for trouble. I suppose the orchestrated funnelling of single men into Europe (a blatant act of war) has crystallised this for the Canadians.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: